Saturday, July 13, 2013

Why Sweden should consider asylum to Edward Snowden

A
positive statement by the Swedish authorities on that Sweden would
consider asylum for Mr Snowden, will help the world to better understand
the real libertarian and independent spirit of the Swedish people – an
aspect that has been sadly obscured in most recent years due to the
abandonment by Swedish authorities of the traditional non-aligned stance
of the nation. Also, it will help stimulate anew dialogue to resolve
the issues at stake and that have thrown a shadow over our sovereignty,
such as the management of the case against Mr Assange.

Beyond the
alleged case of Sweden vs. Assange, or the alleged irregularities of the
case, the issue for Sweden is ultimately the question of
self-government and of whether Sweden can reassume – as many of us
dearly wish – the world podium of No. 1 country in fairness and justice,
in political beauty and respect for human rights to all.

By Marcello Ferrada-Noli

Introduction

The travel-document argument

The shortest distance and secure-route argument

Possible arguments against my proposal

A Swedish asylum for Snowden in the context of the Assange case

Introduction

World
opinion is already on the side of Mr Edward Snowden, who is currently a
refugee in an International airport, deprived of his national passport,
and due to exposing massive spying by the U.S. on friend and foe alike.
I understand that one of the problems faced by Mr Snowden - in case he
would try to implement the asylum granted by Venezuela - is the need of a
travel-document. Another reported problem would be the long and
allegedly insecure route. Further, if Mr Snowden would be unable to take
up asylum in Latin America, and thus forced to accept asylum in Russia,
he will be bound of not declaring any thing that could be considered
detrimental, as “to harm” the U.S. Certainly, Mr Snowden's endeavour has
never been “to harm” his country intentionally. He just exposed the
fashion in which - in my opinion - the U.S. government it does harm
the privacy and personal integrity of the core of his country - the
citizens. Not to mention EU, Asia and Latin-American institutions and
peoples, who have also been treated as enemies via this massive
indiscriminate spying. Nevertheless, the question is also, is the
shelter offered by Russia worth the cost- being banned from revealing
further information?

When Sweden gave me political asylum after my revelations at the Russell Tribunal on Latin America
in Rome 1974, they never put any condition on that I would have to
promise stop the whistleblowing on Pinochet's Junta or about the
aggravating role of the U.S. in the military coup.

As discussed below, stateless refugees have the right to the Alien’s passport that can be issued by any country signatory of the 1954 Geneva Convention (1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons).
I have learned, however, that Venezuela is not a signatory of such
document. But Sweden is. Secondly, The considerably shorter route
between Russia and Sweden also makes that option immediately attractive.

States
parties and signatories to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status
of Stateless Persons. States parties are dark blue; non-states parties
signatories are light blue; non-state parties non-signatories are grey
(Wikimedia Commons)

Sweden
has a notable tradition – in fact historical - in providing asylum for
political and/or humanitarian reasons from the 60´s and onwards.
Unfortunate episodes in which some officials, at some politician’s
orders, have done otherwise, should not supplant facts at large. For
instance, during the Vietnam-War era, Sweden was a refuge for American
“vapenvägrare [conscientious objectors]” (a fact which is not well known
by younger generations outside Sweden); the list of historical episodes
in which Swedish diplomats have, at the highest personal risk, helped
political dissidents or ethnic-persecuted peoples and brought them into
Swedish territory is also notable. The most well known examples are, of
course, those of R. Wallenberg and, more recently, Ambassador Edelstam
in Chile.

This
appeal is totally personal, of my own initiative, and has no bound to
any organization or individuals engaged internationally in their noble
struggle for asylum of Mr Snowden. My expectations declared here are
based solely in my experience as political refugee in Sweden.X

The travel-document argument

One
main problem that Mr Snowden is having, as I have understood, is that
a) he has partly been deprived of his U.S. passport, and b) the
safe-conduct (transit-pass) issued by the Consul of Ecuador in London is
not any longer valid. This below is based in my Swedish experience.

I
remember vividly when the Pinochet government revoked my constitutional
right of renewing my passport, making me stateless, after my testimony
at the Russel Tribunal in Rome 1974 exposing the killings, torture and
horrible crimes perpetrated by the Junta in the Prisoners Camp in which I
have been confined. Helped by lawyer Hans Göran Frank (one of the
founders of Amnesty International Sweden), I obtained political asylum
and a främnlingpass (alien’s passport) according to the
Geneva-Convention in a matter of weeks. While researching in this case, I
saw that the Immigration authority is now providing extensive
information about this possibility (here explained in English).

Unlike
many other countries, for instance countries of Latin America, Sweden
has not made it (in absolute terms) compulsory for the refugee applying
for asylum to produce travel documents at the border. A proof of this
irregularity is the significant category “papperlösa” [paperless]
amongst the immigrants or refugees in Sweden. Here we have also to
distinguish between the possession of travel-documents (such as a
national passport, or Geneva-Convention aliens’ passport - främling pass),
and the understandable need of verifying the individual’s identity. In
this sense, the situation for Mr Snowden is quite more favourable (he
does not have travel papers but his identity is fully verifiable).

So it looked the cover of my Alien's passport - for "stateless" refugees, as now Mr Snowden

Sweden,
and I understand all countries that signatories of the 1954 Geneva
Convention, can issue the so called alien’s passport, and by which the
refugee that holds it may travel to all countries except his/her country
of origin. As a matter of fact, I used such a travel document to enter
the U.S. in 1977 in occasion of a meeting with my father, then in
Washington.X

The shortest distance & secure-route argument

There
is also the logistics dimension of the problem, in the context of
alleged perils of a long flight across Europa and the Atlantic. Even if
Snowden would like to implement any asylum proposition from Latin
America, for instance of Venezuela, the problem of transportation
remains.

Besides,
Snowden is reportedly to have declared that he settles now for asylum
in Russia only because he ”could not fly to Latin America”. This problem
is solved if travel will be done to “neighbouring” Sweden. Geographic
realities are obvious in this line of reasoning.X

Possible arguments against my proposal

I
am also prepared to meet some opposition or criticism about this
proposal among supporters of Mr Snowden. I could anticipate that one
argument against the proposal is that some Swedish officials and
politicians have demonstrated in the past years (since the times of
former Justice Minister Thomas Bodström and onwards) a collaborationist
stance towards the U.S., including the implementation of Intelligence
agreements and operations. Thus, “they will work to give Snowden away”.

I
have myself criticized that collaborationist stance in my columns and
have argued (I still do) for a returning to a geopolitical stand of
non-alignment and non-intervention. I am convinced that geopolitical
Neutrality, together with reliance in our own, independent military
might, best service Sweden’s national security interests. Also, a
Neutral Sweden can best serves the world at large, as it was during the
times in which Sweden’s mediation in complex international conflicts
served world peace. That task enhanced and maintained the international
stature of Sweden. Thus, although a “non-alignment doctrine” would mean
non-intervention in military terms, it would also mean political and
diplomatic intervention to the highest degree.

However,
Mr Snowden has declared himself that his intentions are not to harm the
U.S.; neither does he believe his leaks harm the US.

On
the other hand, the possibilities that some amongst the most eager or
passionate “Pro-U.S.” politicians would advocate for the extradition or
ousting of Mr Snowden would be still there and it is not likely they
will disappear completely from the debate. Neither would that stance
disappear in Ecuador or Venezuela, for that part, in case Mr Snowden
ends there. Sweden is unlikely to allow extradition to the US if the
death penalty is involved, as that would violate Swedish law. The
average Swede, the one electing the average politician, does indeed
consider Snowden a whistle-blower and in Sweden we have the Swedish
protective-legislation on whistleblowers-related behaviour. And for
those argueing that Swedes are prone to follow U.S. fashions, well, in
this case it would be positive if true: It is already known that the
majority of Americans, according to recent poll, do consider Snowden a
whistleblower and not, as has been asserted by the U.S. government and
associated news media, a “spy” or "traitor". And, in the context of this
appeal, most revealing is one U.S. News poll on whether Foreign
countries should provide asylum to Mr Snowden. See update below.

U.S. News poll, update 14 July 2013

Further,
in my opinion, the general opinion in Sweden is that Snowden is a
whistle-blower. Then we have the Swedish protective-legislation on
whistleblowers-related behaviour. And for those, with right, argumenting
that Swedes may be prone to follow U.S. fashions, well, in this case it
would be positive if true: It is already known in Sweden that the
majority of Americans (according to recent poll) do consider Snowden as a
whistleblower and not, as has been asserted by the U.S. government and
associated news media, a “spy”.

Sweden could become –attending to the present circumstances – a good possibility of asylum for Edward Snowden.X

A Swedish asylum for Snowden in the context of the Assange case

With
regard to the "case Assange", the international position of Sweden has
suffered due to a two-fold stance. On the one hand, because of the
treatment given to the legal case, and secondly due to the public stance of some high-profile Swedish politicians and journalists have taken on the person of Assange.

On
the other hand, this "case" has evolved parallel to an increasing
openly alignment by Sweden with U.S. interests, not only militarily and
at geopolitical levels, but also in matters of information-sharing,
intelligence cooperation and protection of American industrial
businesses and copyrights. Some of these themes, such as free
information, are part of the main profile of WikiLeaks.

From
an international perspective - Swedish authorities seem to be unwilling
to end the case (for instance by interrogating Assange in London) and
are insisting an extradition to Sweden despite other reasonable options.
I have gone into this in detail in several articles in my blog. This
situation around the case against the WikiLeaks founder – even
considering that the allegations in Sweden are not formally related to
Assange’s anti-secret organization, become over time more complicated
and the impasse harder to deal with – for all concerned.

I
accept that others may disagree with this assessment of Sweden’s case
against Assange. However, the above summary might be a fair description
of how the international community broadly –at least in social media –
perceives the situation. Right or wrong factually, it is in any case a
sad situation for Sweden, because it does not do justice to the
tradition of Sweden as both a sovereign, neutral, independent, and
loving-peace nation. I firmly believe that this - to declare openness
towards the whistleblower's asylum - is also an opportunity for Sweden.

Finally.
I believe I know the Swedish domestic panorama fairly well. That is why
I dare to go on with this proposal - against the known odds. For
although I have Italian ancestry, or I live in Italy, I am in fact
myself a Geneva-Convention political refugee from Chile, and I became a
Swedish national 1979. I am one of the founders of MIR and as both a
militant in the Chilean resistance against Pinochet and a prisoner in
the Stadium and Quiriquina Island Prisoners Camp, I have borne witness
to the earnest solidarity, and audacity, of previous Swedish governments
and their envoys.

Thus,
I dare to recall that honourable Swedish tradition and ask all Swedish
political parties to endorse a proposition of asylum for Mr Edward
Snowden. As Mr Björn Brändewall, from the Liberal Party in Kalmar put it
recently, the revelations of Mr Snowden show that an American
government agency spies on its own people in violation of the country's
Constitution" ["Snowdens avslöjanden pekar på att en amerikansk
myndighet spionerar på det egna folket i strid med landets
konstitution", Fria människör hittar lösningar, 8/7-2013].

When
I was a child of the sixties Sweden enjoyed a worldwide reputation for
freedom and liberalism. This was confirmed in the ’70s when Sweden gave
asylum to Marcello Ferrada-Noli. In his own words,

I
remember vividly when the Pinochet government revoked my constitutional
right of renewing my passport, making me stateless, after my testimony
at the Russel Tribunal in Rome 1974 exposing the killings, torture and
horrible crimes perpetrated by the Junta in the Prisoners Camp in which I
have been confined. Helped by lawyer Hans Göran Frank (one of the
founders of Amnesty International Sweden), I obtained political asylum
and a främnlingpass (alien’s passport) according to the
Geneva-Convention in a matter of weeks.Why Sweden should consider asylum to Edward Snowden

Ferrada-Noli
is now calling on Sweden to reaffirm that old reputation largely lost
in recent years through the increasingly open “alignment by Sweden with
U.S. interests, not only militarily and at geopolitical levels, but also
in matters of information-sharing, intelligence cooperation and
protection of American industrial businesses and copyrights.”

Sweden,
as we now know from Edward Snowden, is effectively the ‘sixth eye’;
part of the global Echelon/Five Eyes surveillance system operated by the
US, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Sweden’s role is to monitor
Russian internet traffic for the NSA.

Sweden’s
new status is further confirmed by the country’s treatment of the
Assange ‘rape’ case — there is absolutely no legal or logical reason why
Assange could not be questioned in the Ecuador embassy in London. The
only explanation can be Sweden’s determination to get Assange onto
Swedish soil from where he can be shipped to the US for trial.

Ferrada-Noli
believes that Sweden could regain its old liberal position by now
offering Snowden asylum in the same way it was granted him many years
ago. It’s a lovely thought. I believe that the Swedish people would
welcome Snowden. But like so many ‘western’ countries, behind the facade
of democracy, governments no longer reflect the people.

It will never happen. In fact it must not happen — not while Carl Bildt has a breath in his body

That means: You are free to copy, distribute, display, the above-referred materials, under the following conditions

Attribution. You must attribute the work (full text, text excerpts, or artwork as indicated above) in this specified manner: Author’s name and hyperlink of the article or artwork in the Professors blog

Any of these conditions may be waived by seeking permission from Professors blogg. For contact email fdenoli@gmail.com